A prominent figure of UC and the pro-independence umbrella, the FLNKS, Roch Wamytan, is the current chairman of the local Parliament (the Congress) and one of the pro-independence representatives who also signed the autonomy-loaded Nouméa Accord in 1998.
He denounced the [Macron] visit saying: "It seems to me that the whole thing is staged.
"The whole country is in chaos and the French President arrives. The format in which he comes to visit is not the proper one, at least, this is my feeling," he told public broadcaster Nouvelle-Calédonie la 1ère.
He also disapproved of French government ministers Gérald Darmanin (Home Affairs and Overseas) and Sébastien Lecornu (Defence, formerly Overseas) being part of the presidential delegation "because these are ministers whom we have had many difficulties in the past".
"The real question we are expecting him to answer is whether he will or not withdraw this constitutional amendment so that we can have a clear horizon and discuss things in depth," he said.
"Things to come later will largely depend on what kind of answer he will provide to this question."
Another component of the FLNKS umbrella, the UPM (Progressist Union in Melanesia - Union progressiste en Mélanésie), through its President Victor Tutugoro, said he would be willing to meet Macron, hoping that "at least we could obtain the postponing of the constitutional amendment" targeting a change in eligibility rules for voters at local elections.
"We have to give ourselves time and ... the right method to move ahead," he said.
"It's a good thing that he is coming. It's up to him to find the right words and attitude to appease things.
"All will depend on what he will announce and the way he will speak to the population, including to those who are still erecting roadblocks and contributing to the rioting."
Former PM's analysis
Former French PM Edouard Philippe (2017-2020), on Tuesday said he hoped the French President was coming with announcements that are "up to the expectations".
"The situation [in New Caledonia] is terribly sad and dangerous. France has a complicated rapport to its colonial history; it has the opportunity to find an original solution," Philippe said, adding the "priority of all priorities" was to reach a political agreement between pro-France and pro-independence local parties.
This agreement, he said, would have to find a political "space".
"We need to invent unb the next framework"
"We just can't ask ourselves every second year, every five years, if we want to remain French, while bearing in mind that the Kanak people's aspiration for independence and self-determination will never disappear.
"So we have to find an agreement between the long-term stability and this aspiration. If we deny this [aspiration], there will always be violent repetitions."Mixed feelings ahead of French President Emmanuel Macron's visit to riot-hit New Caledonia

Президент на Република България „De antiquitate Paterni soli, et de rebus Bulgaricis ad suos Compatriotas“ , die älteste historische Abhandlung über Bulgarien, um 1667 von dem katholischen Geistlichen und Schriftgelehrten Petar Bogdan vollendet, ist eines der wertvollsten bulgarischen Schriftdenkmäler.
Auf 200 Seiten befasst sich das Manuskript mit der christlichen Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der bulgarischen Länder und sollte damals im katholischen Europa Unterstützung für die Befreiung Bulgariens von der osmanischen Herrschaft mobilisieren. Petar Bogdan errichtete die Bulgarische Katholische Eparchie wieder und war einer der Organisatoren des Tschiprowzi-Aufstandes (1688) gegen die osmanische Herrschaft, der jedoch erst nach seinem Tod ausbrach. Lange Zeit glaubte man in wissenschaftlichen Kreisen, dass die Abhandlung im Laufe der Zeit verloren gegangen sei und keine Kopie davon überliefert wurde. In den 1970er Jahren entdeckte Prof. Bozidar Dimitrov in der Bibliothek des Vatikans einzelne Seiten einer bearbeiteten Abschrift. Das bisher einzige bekannte Exemplar wurde 2017 von Prof. Dr. Lilia Ilieva geborgen. Gestern wurde eine Kopie am Präsidentensitz in Sofia vorgestellt..

Der Aufstand von Tschiprowzi (bulgarisch Чипровско въстание Tschiprowsko wastanie) war ein Aufstand der bulgarischen Bevölkerung in der Region um Tschiprowzi nördlich des Balkangebirges gegen die bis dahin fast 300 Jahre andauernde osmanische Herrschaft.

Der Aufstand brach 1688 aus, nachdem die kaiserlichen Truppen unter dem Kommando von Max Emanuel am 6. September 1688 Belgrad eingenommen hatten. Er wurde von Nachfahren katholischer Bergleute aus Sachsen und bulgarischer Katholiken organisiert, sowie von der orthodoxen Bevölkerung mitgetragen. Tschiprowzi und die umliegende Orte hatten damals um die 6000 Einwohner. Die acht Abteilungen der Aufständischen unter den Hauptleuten Marinow, Stanislawow, Andrejnin und weiteren zählten jeweils einige hundert Kämpfer. Nachdem die nächste türkische Garnison angegriffen und vernichtet wurde, folgte der Gegenangriff des Sofioter Beglerbegs und seines ungarischen Verbündeten Emmerich Thököly. Die eingesetzten Baschibosuken und weitere irreguläre Truppen richteten ein Gemetzel unter der Bevölkerung an und zerstörten die Orte Tschiprowzi, Schelesna, Klisura und Kopilowzi. Es wurden mindestens Tausend Menschen umgebracht, "zweitausend Knaben und Frauen versklavt" (wie Knjazhevic berichtet), etwa dreitausend Bewohner der Gegend flüchteten nach Norden. Sie siedelten sich mit Zustimmung Kaiser Leopolds I. nördlich der Donau, im Banat an und bildeten dort über Jahrhunderte bulgarische Dorfgemeinschaften, wie die bis ins 20. Jahrhundert dort lebenden und auch so genannten Banater Bulgaren.[1]
Einer der Initiatoren und Mitorganisator war der Bischof Petar Bogdan, der die erste Geschichte Bulgariens verfasste und katholischer Erzbischof Bulgariens, der Moldau und Walachei war

Petar Bogdan Bakschitsch[1] oder Bakschew (* 1601 in Tschiprowzi, Osmanisches Reich als Bogdan Bakschew (bulgarisch Богдан Бакшев); † 1674 ebenda) war ein bulgarischer katholischer Erzbischof, Historiker, Kustos im Franziskanerorden, Schlüsselfigur der bulgarischen Befreiungsbewegung und Aufklärer während der Bulgarischen Wiedergeburt.
Petar Bogdan errichtete die Bulgarische Katholische Eparchie wieder und war einer der Organisatoren des Tschiprowzi-Aufstandes gegen die osmanische Herrschaft, der jedoch erst nach seinem Tod ausbrach. Man nimmt an, dass er die älteste Geschichte Bulgariens verfasste De antiquitate Patrerni soli, et de rebus Bulgaricis (zu Dt. Über die Antike des Vaterlandes und die bulgarischen Angelegenheiten, Bulg. За древността на бащината земя и за българските дела, ISBN 978-954-07-5045-3), lange vor Païssi von Hilandars Slawobulgarische Geschichte.[2] Petar Bogdan – Wikipedia

Sexuelle Übergriffe Selbstverteidigung für alle? GLP-Grossrätin fordert Kurse an der Oberstufe.
Annetta Schuppisser (GLP) möchte, dass zum Schutz vor sexuellen Übergriffen im Sportunterricht auch Selbstverteidigung vermittelt wird.
«Die Zahl an Vergewaltigungen in der Schweiz ist seit vielen Jahren steigend», schreibt GLP-Grossrätin Annetta Schuppisser in einem Postulat. GLP Grossrätin fordert Selbstverteidigungskurse im Schulunterricht

(Die komplette Stellungnahme von Georgischer Traum auf facebook):
Statement by the Political Council of Georgian Dream
Yesterday, international media outlets disseminated information about a bill initiated by one of the US Congresspersons. The bill reads that Georgia will enjoy visa liberalization and a free trade agreement (FTA) provided that the authorities call off the law on the transparency of NGOs, refrain from adopting the law against LGBT propaganda, hold decent elections, and steer clear of negative rhetoric against America. Otherwise, the bill envisages sanctions against government officials.
The bill has yet to be adopted, and prospects of its adoption are quite unclear. In recent years, similar special bills on Georgia have been initiated in Congress twice, though none of them has seen the light of day. However, given that the new bill provides fertile ground for speculations on the part of the Georgian opposition, we believe that it calls for a response.
Firstly, it should be noted that the adoption of the law on the transparency of NGOs, and criticism from American officials, both have their own objective reasons. For years, Georgia is forced to live in the conditions of so-called polarization, with externally financed NGOs playing the key role in this. Worse still, since November 2020, NGOs have attempted twice to spark a revolution in Georgia. In addition, over these years, our country has been subjected to continuous criticism from American politicians and officials, in this way forcing the Government of Georgia to defend itself with adequate rhetoric.
In light of the foregoing, upgrading the Georgia-US relations is totally up to the correct actions of the American side. And this calls for showing respect for the Georgian state and the Georgian people instead of making promises with more than ambiguous prospects and turning to insulting blackmail. Unfortunately, some American politicians and officials continue making mistake after mistake and employ the language of blackmail in communication with Georgia.
The Government of Georgia does not play games. We are adopting the law on the transparency of NGOs because we see no other way to pacify the country. As mentioned earlier, NGOs have tried twice since 2020 to start a revolution, and we cannot idle away in anticipation of a third attempt. For us, this law is not an object of trade but an effective means to defend Georgia’s sovereignty, and we cannot, under any circumstances, trade on the country’s sovereignty, nor can we leave unfair attacks on Georgia unanswered. This is our responsibility to the Georgian people, who have granted us the mandate to govern the country.
A decent attitude toward Georgia must have been expressed in an absolutely different manner. With such attitude in place:
- The US would have proved in deed that it is Georgia’s strategic partner, granting in particular visa liberalization to Georgian citizens and signing an FTA without any caveat. The American bill makes it clear that the US could have done this before, nonetheless exhibiting indifference toward the Georgian people instead.
- The US would have invested in the Georgian economy, with 2009-2011 marking the last time it was done, in order to save Saakashvili’s regime from economic meltdown.
- The US would have ensured behavior change among NGOs, namely putting an end to their policy of non-recognition of the legitimacy of the Georgian Government, and brushing aside their revolutionary plans.
- The use of the topic of the EU as a tool for constantly blackmailing Georgia would have stopped. By the end of this year, negotiations with Georgia would have kicked off, in this way restoring justice in relation to Ukraine, Moldova, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.
With all of the above in place, the law on the transparency of NGOs becomes unnecessary, relieving us of the obligation to respond to unfair statements. But, if NGOs persist in their revolutionary attempts, assaulting the Orthodox Christian Church, supporting religious extremism, encouraging political intervention and playing the religious card to this end, also engaging in LGBT and narcotics propaganda, seeking to shake state institutions, and creating obstacles for economic projects—while some American politicians and officials continue their attacks against Georgia—we will need the law on transparency, and we will be forced to retaliate. Consequently, the adoption of the law on the transparency of NGOs at this point has no alternative.
Our partners can put our relations in qualitative order in a matter of one year at most. If they come to understand this, our relations will be straightened out very fast. However, continuously utilizing the same attitude toward Georgia will jeopardize the interests of both Georgia and America.
As mentioned above, it is all in the hands of our partners, and Georgia, a small country, is unable to change anything unilaterally. Thus, we must hope that rational thinking prevails in America, only to benefit both countries.